AN APOLOGY FOR POESY VERSUS ASTROPHIL AND STELLA BY SIR PHILIP SIDNEY Yrd. Doç ...

15 Pages·2009·0.14 MB·English

AN APOLOGY FOR POESY VERSUS ASTROPHIL AND
STELLA BY SIR PHILIP SIDNEY
Yrd. Doç. Dr. A. Serdar ÖZTÜRK
Erciyes Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi
[email protected]
Abstract:
An Apology for Poesy presents certain implications by which the reader can
determine Sidney s purpose in composing Astrophil and Stella. These implications
generally emphasize the connection between his imaginative work, Astrophil and Stella and
An Apology for Poesy, his critical book. Sidney left the readers no conclusive evidence that
he intended Astrophil and Stella to reflect his poetic theory. The most essential function of
An Apology for Poesy is that the poetry has to display a moral purpose. This has led to
advice for all poets to consider this purpose within their own poetry. It is a fact that Sir
Philip Sidney tries to apply the general principles in An Apology for Poesy in his
composing of Astrophil and Stella
Key Words: Sir Philip Sidney, An Apology for Poesy, Astrophil and Stella,
Sonnet
Öz
An Apology for Poesy, Sidney in Astrophil and Stella adl eserini yazmasnn
amac hakknda okuyucularn bir yargya varmasna yardmc olmak için önemli ip uçlar
verir. Bu bilgiler genel olarak hayal ürünü olan Astrophil and Stella ile el tirel bir eser olan
An Apology for Poesy arasndaki ili kiyi vurgular. Sidney Astrophil and Stella adl eserini
yazarken okuyucuya kendi iir dü üncesini yanstacak kapsaml bir bilgi vermez. An
Apology for Poesy nin en önemli i levi iirin ahlsksal ders verme amacyla yazlmasn
vurgulamaktr. Bu da airlerin iirlerini bu tavsiyeler do rultusunda yazmaya sevk etmi tir.
Sir Philip Sidney An Apology for Poesy de öne sürdü ü genel ilkelere Astrophil and
Stella y yazarken uygulamaya çal t bir gerçektir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Sir Philip Sidney, An Apology for Poesy, Astrophil and
Stella, Sone
There are many critical studies that analyze Arcadia in the light of An
Apology for Poesy (Evans 14). These studies generally emphasize the connection
between his imaginative work, Astrophil and Stella and An Apology for Poesy, his
critical book. Unfortunately, there are not any satisfactory studies to establish the
moral and stylistic links between Sidney s work Astrophil and Stella and his well-
known theory An Apology for Poesy. Sidney left the readers no conclusive
evidence that he intended Astrophil and Stella to reflect his poetic theory. Yet, An
Apology for Poesy presents hints for confirming his purpose in Astrophil and Stella
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
and the work functions as a kind of overview to the style and structure of the
sonnet sequence. Astrophil and Stella functions to serve as the same moral end that
An Apology for Poesy maintains for the purpose of all good poetry.
Noteworthy interpretations have already been made about the seeming
contradictions between Sir Philip Sidney s theory in An Apology for Poesy and his
practice in Astrophil and Stella. One contradiction turns around the fact that An
Apology for Poesy recommends a craftsmanship which stresses that a poet must
know how to write poetry, whereas in Astrophil and Stella, Astrophil is found to
advocate spontaneity and inspiration while at the same time using conscious
craftsmanship. This contradiction motivated Hallet Smith to attempt a resolution
for this problem (21). Another contradiction that baffles readers is the structure of
Astrophil and Stella. An Apology for Poesy underlines unity and order, and a poet
must consider the plot, foreground, or central idea to provide a structure for his
poetry, but Astrophil and Stella seems to lack the structure, and the sequence seems
to have been written together haphazardly. Richard B. Young deals with this issue
with varying degrees of convincing analysis (71). A. C. Hamilton claims that the
sonnets do not provide a sequence and that they are merely an attempt at an
Anatomy of Love (76).
In this study, some of the matters of style are dealt with i.e. matters of form
related to deliberate craftsmanship versus spontaneous inspiration. In An Apology
for Poesy, Sir Philip Sidney maintains
[n]ature never set forth the earth in so rich tapestry as divers
poets have done neither with pleasant rivers, fruitful trees, sweet-
smelling flowers, nor whatsoever else may make the too much loved
earth more lovely. Her world is brazen, the poets only deliver a golden
(34).
Sidney s use of nature is commonly attributed to the attitude of
Renaissance writers who accepted a fundamentally Aristotelian view of imitation:
the representation of general truths in nature. They tried to capture the significance
of the external world of object and action (Montgomery 34). Sidney says that
nature is the object of art, and that the poet is blessed with the ability to provide
things better than nature. This blessing is accepted to be a divine gift, which puts
the poet above nature and enables him to go beyond to the actual world. He is
inspired to present the nature more beautiful, because he is considered as a passive
agent to the voice of divine inspiration. His poetic skill is a synthetic expression
of some supernatural vision (Cooper 15). Similarly, in Astrophil and Stella Stella is
identified as the natural source of poetic expression and Astrophil asserts that the
sweet sounds of Stella s name alone inspire him without concern for proper word
choice:
2
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
But now I mean no more your help to try
Nor other sugaring of my speech to prove,
But on her name incessantly to cry.
For let me but name her whom I do love
So sweet sounds straight mine ear and heart do hit
That I well find no eloquence like it (LV 9-14).
But know that I in pure simplicity
Breathe out the flames which burn within my heart,
Love only reading unto me this art (XXVIII 12-14).
The first sonnet indicates the faults of other poets who relied on
conventional devices and high decorative styles to write their poetry. Astrophil
expects to write from the pure truth of Stella s natural effect on his emotions, not
from conscious craftsmanship. He also cannot avoid using some craft himself in
shaping the body of his verse. The aesthetic contradiction of spontaneity and
craftsmanship reflects Astrophil s psychic and philosophical conflicts and sets the
stage for the division within Astrophil. It is also played out in the rest of the sonnet
sequence:
I sought fit words to paint the blackest face of woe:
Studying inventions fine, her wits to entertain,
Oft turning others' leaves, to see if thence would flow
Some fresh and fruitful showers upon my sunburned brain.
But words came halting forth, wanting Invention's stay;
Invention, Nature's child, fled stepdame Study's blows;
And others' feet still seemed but strangers in my way.
Thus, great with child to speak, and helpless in my throes,
Biting my truant pen, beating myself for spite:
"Fool," said my Muse to me, "look in thy heart, and write (I 5-14).
In An Apology for Poesy, Sir Philip Sidney goes on claiming that the poet
should be conscious of his craft:
They that delight in poesy itself should seek to know what they
do, and how they do, and especially look themselves in an unflattering
glass of reason, if they be inclinable unto it (72).
As a matter of fact, the inspired poet works with the art , imitation and
exercise of his own genius to lead the inspired words into poetry (Apology 72).
The Glass of Reason leads us to believe that the poet must be conscious of what he
is trying to achieve in his poetry, and he cannot be merely a passive transporter of
divine reflections. Sidney was aware of the extremes of slavish style and ornament
that poetry had fallen into, and this condition stimulated him to defend good poetry
against criticism in his An Apology for Poesy. Instead of the stylistic and
3
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
mechanical aspect of good poetry, Sidney thought he could elevate poetry s
significance by stressing the role of inspiration in its writing process.
Astrophil usually complains that he is the passive recorder writing only
what Stella affects in him, but it is known that the responsibility of the poetry
belongs to the poet. By his poetic craft Astrophil is out to convince Stella of his
emotional sincerity concerning his being inspired by her. Astrophil and Stella
exhibits logical, rational word choices and conventional rhyme schemes that they
cannot be the voice of pure inspiration alone. When the poet feels the extremes of
joy or anguish about Stella, he cannot arrange the words to write because his
logical thought processes are too disorganised:
O joy high for my low style to show;
O bliss, fit for a nobler state than me (VXIX 1-2).
Oh fate, oh fault, oh curse, child of my bliss,
What sobs can give words grace my grief to show?
What ink is black enough to paint my woe? (XCIII 1-3)
It is possible to see the kind of contradiction between practice and theory
that appears to violate An Apology for Poesy. M. Sherod Cooper makes an
interesting and credible explanation that resolves this apparent contradiction in
Astrophil and Stella. He maintains that Astrophil is a dramatic character who talks
about sonnets sent to Stella. The sonnets do not represent Sidney s own opinion
because the style of the sequence uses contrivances and styles that Astrophil
derides and because protesting sincerity is the typical stance of the Petrarchan
lover. Astrophil writes these sonnets as stage properties in an attempt to justify
his passions (21).
Readers wonder why the sonnet sequence appears so haphazard, disordered
and sudden changes in mood and thought since Sidney s sonnets in themselves
present order and unity. It is easy to believe that Hamilton is right to say that
Astrophil and Stella is merely an anatomy of love with no deliberate narrative
thread tying it together (76). Yet, in An Apology for Poesy, Sidney satirises the
poets who lack strength, or poetical sinews in their verses:
Do I not remember to have seen but few (to speak boldly) printed
that have poetical sinews in them: for proof whereof, let but most of the
verses but put in prose, and then ask the meaning, and it will be found
that one verse did but beget another, without ordering at the first what
should be at the last; which becomes a confused mass of words with a
tingling sound of rhyme, barely accompanied with reason (74).
Sidney criticises their lack of overall structure and reason. He asserts that
lyrical poetry must convey a meaning and, at the same time, must present a
meaningful, structural thread. A. C. Hamilton s analysis of the sonnets as a
sequence is supportive of Sidney s poetical sinews because he suggested that a
4
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
three-part structure unifies the sonnets (78). Richard Young s assumption turns
around the unity of Astrophil and Stella and maintains that the changes in mood
and style can be drawn together under purpose consistent with each other (88).
These assumptions are important in as much as they attempt to find some structure
in the sonnets based on a unifying principle that reveals meaning in the sonnets. It
seems logical to agree with Hamilton that Astrophil and Stella is carefully written
with a structure underlying it, but that structure is not self-evident and simple( 67).
In An Apology for Poesy, Sir Philip Sidney implies that a meaningful idea
should permeate the entire work of a poet:
Many of such writings as come under the banner of unresistable
love, if I were a mistress, would never persuade me they were in love;
so coldly they apply fiery speeches, as men that had rather read lovers
writings, and so caught up certain swelling phrases which hang together
. . . than that in truth they feel these passions, which easily (as I think)
may be bewrayed by the same forcibleness or energia (as the Greeks
call it) of the writer (81).
In this extract, Forrest G. Robinson claims that Sidney employs energia to
mean a conceptual clarity in language, but this clarity can result only from the
poets precise apprehension of his own fore-conceit (81). Energia as used in this
extract helps to emphasise Sidney s belief that the poet is to set forth an Idea, or
fore-conceit, that shapes the moral theme of the poem. The comprehension that the
reader should attain from the poem depends on that controlling fore-conceit:
For any understanding knoweth the skill of the artificer standeth
in that Idea or fore-conceit of the work, and not in the work itself. And
that the poet hath that Idea is manifest by delivering them forth in such
excellency as he hath imagined them (Apology 16).
According to Sidney, Idea, or fore-conceit is
a mental object, a generic concept which comprehends an
abundant variety of particular objects in any class. If the poet can
translate his general Idea into the words of a poem, then he will have
produced a moral example superior to the specific or particular objects
of external nature (16).
There is a moral example, embodied in the fore-conceit of the poet, which
is presented in the meaningful narrative of poetry:
[Readers] shall use the narration but as an imaginative ground-
plot of a profitable invention (Apology 58).
It is a fact that Sidney is concerned with the structure involved in poetry,
and ground-plot here emphasises the significance of a unity or framework that
the reader used use to work out ( invent ) the full meaning of the poet s original
Idea or fore-conceit (Apology 58).
5
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
In respect to poet s function, the significant aspect of An Apology for Poesy
is not only to teach the meaning of the poet s abstract fore-conceit, but also to
move the reader to act upon that which has been taught. The end of the poetry is to
delight and teach, but the readers do not like pure knowledge of the goodness
which is taught if they cannot be delighted and thereby moved to take that
goodness in hand (Apology 20). The end of the poetry is to lead and draw us to as
high a perfection as our degenerate souls, made worse by their clayey lodgings, can
be capable of (Apology 22). Sidney thinks that poetry provides the moral which
leads reader to the highest moral perfection, for our erected wit maketh us how
what perfection is, and yet our infected will keepth us from reaching unto it
(Apology 17). It is difficult to imagine Sidney s writing Astrophil and Stella
without guiding abstract moral principle or fore-conceit in mind because of his
emphasis on the moral purpose of poetry because the moral quality in poetry is the
essential principle in An Apology for Poesy.
In one-fourth of Astrophil and Stella, it is supposed that Astrophil who
represents passion, will and carnal desires, will never be able to conquer Stella who
represents virtue, reason and wit. Sidney would violate all principles of morality if
Astrophil succeeded in his efforts to undermine Stella s virtue. At the same time
Sidney would present a picture of a distorted love wherein passion has the upper
hand. So, this would hardly be an instructive message for the readers. Shortly, the
pedagogical moral purpose which Sidney assigns to poetry would not exist, or at
least it would be violated. Love comes into Astrophil s heart in sonnet 8, and Stella
is described as a citadel of virtue fortified by wit in sonnet 12. It is possible to form
an image of a soldier employing all of his skill to get into a castle but finding it
impossible:
At length he [Love] perch'd himself in Stella's joyful face,
Whose fair skin, beamy eyes, like morning sun on snow,
Deceiv'd the quaking boy, who thought from so pure light
Effects of lively heat must needs in nature grow.
But she most fair, most cold, made him thence take his flight
To my close heart, where while some firebrands he did lay,
He burnt un'wares his wings, and cannot fly away (VIII 8-14).
What words so ere she speak persuades for thee,
That her clear voice lifts thy fame to the skies:
Thou countest Stella thine, like those whose powers
Having got up a breach by fighting well,
Cry, "Victory, this fair day all is ours."
Oh no, her heart is such a citadel,
So fortified with wit, stored with disdain,
That to win it, is all the skill and pain (XII 7-14).
6
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
In this situation there is no question that desire will be disregarded and
virtue will be the supreme hallmark.
It is not difficult to understand Sidney s fundamental moral concern for
virtue over passion if it is considered that Renaissance writers accept Aristotle s
concept of rational and irrational principles. This concept displays that the rational
and irrational principles are in harmony only when the rational leads the irrational:
For we praise the rational principle of the continent man and of
the incontinent, and the part of their soul that has such a principle, since
it urges them a right and toward the best objects; but there is found in
them also another element naturally opposed to the rational principle,
which fights against and resists that principle . . . or shares in it so far as
it listens to it and obeys it (Ross 14).
When the passions are disturbed, these two naturally hostile principles lead
us to believe that reason is the instrument of self control. However, reason alone
does not originate action though mind conceives the objects of action, some
elements of desire are always necessary (Ross 15). Moreover, the rational power is
divided into reason and will though former seeks truth through a logical train of
thought . . . the reason determines what is good and what is evil and informs the
will of its conclusions (Ross 15).
It is no coincidence that Sidney preferred the names Stella (star: the symbol
of the Light of Reason) and Astrophil (star-lover: the Lover of Reason). Astrophil,
because of his love of reason, is essentially teachable. He learns that Stella s virtue
is the rational power which leads his basic nature. Yet it is part of Sidney s
Protestant theology to prove Astrophil s perverted will in learning Stella s lesson
of virtue. Astrophil is used by Sidney as the particular example of what happens
when the will is corrupted by the passions and the understanding becomes confused
by them. In sonnet IV, virtue allies with reason, and Astrophil s will, urged by his
passion, objects to this alliance:
Virtue, alas, now let me take some rest.
Thou set'st a bate between my soul and wit.
If vain love have my simple soul oppress'd,
Leave what thou likest not, deal not thou with it.
The scepter use in some old Cato's breast;
Churches or schools are for thy seat more fit.
I do confess, pardon a fault confess'd,
My mouth too tender is for thy hard bit.
But if that needs thou wilt usurping be,
The little reason that is left in me,
And still th'effect of thy persuasions prove:
I swear, my heart such one shall show to thee
That shrines in flesh so true a deity,
That Virtue, thou thyself shalt be in love.
7
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
Astrophil is conscious of the power of reason, although in his confused
state he pays it only nominal service.
Astrophil s misfortune in Astrophil and Stella is brought about by his
abuse of reason. In the first ten sonnets, it is possible to see only one major abuse.
He charges reason to quit meddling with and framing his passions. Reason does not
concern itself with drawing the guidelines of his moral conduct, nor does it busy
itself with his personal experience, but it ascends to a higher level of thought. He
wills reason to fail in controlling his morals, and by willing reason to do so, he
anticipates that reason will release him from the defect of understanding his moral
corruption:
Reason, in faith thou art well serv'd, that still
Wouldst brabbling be with sense and love in me:
I rather wish'd thee climb the Muses' hill,
Or reach the fruit of Nature's choicest tree,
Or seek heav'n's course, or heav'n's inside to see:
Why shouldst thou toil our thorny soil to till?
Leave sense, and those which sense's objects be:
Deal thou with powers of thoughts, leave love to will.
But thou wouldst needs fight both with love and sense,
With sword of wit, giving wounds of dispraise,
Till downright blows did foil thy cunning fence:
For soon as they strake thee with Stella's rays,
Reason thou kneel'dst, and offeredst straight to prove
By reason good, good reason her to love (X).
Sir Philip Sidney shows us Astrophil, confused and passion-ridden,
misunderstanding the role of reason. He considers reason disgraces itself when it
insists on meddling with man s desires, and he insists that reason only deals with
the impersonal, intellectual functions of thought, such as science, philosophy and
literature. He cannot comprehend the true task of reason which is to help man first
understand himself. As Sidney discusses in An Apology for Poesy, the knowledge
acquired from all sciences
directed to the highest end of the mistress knowledge . . . which stand
(as I think) in the knowledge of man s self, in the ethic and politic
consideration, with the end of well doing and not of well knowing only
(23).
The exact knowledge of self orders that reason should be given a chance to
guide and govern man s desires, thereby establishing internal harmony within the
microcosm of man. On the other hand, if man allows the irrational, desirous part to
lead the rational part, confusion, chaos and internal strife will be his lot. Man s
moral vision will be chaotic in a state of confusion, and desires will be followed as
if it is a virtue. Reason is firstly assigned to high intellectual endeavours, because it
8
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
protects man from falling victim to insatiable desires which damages man s moral
stature. So, Astrophil uses reason to be that moral guide rather than the instrument
of high intellectual knowledge.
On the other hand, Stella is the epitome of reason since she employs reason
to serve and fortify her virtuous attitude. For Stella, reason is not divorced from the
practical, personal experiences and daily moral decisions with which one has to
cope. Song 8, the only song written in the third person, gives reader an observation
of an incident between Stella and Astrophil. It displays an indication of Stella s
ability to use reason to master her impulses. Stella confesses that she is very much
in love with Astrophil. They sigh with arms crossed and communicate to each other
their mighty emotions:
Sigh they did, but now betwixt
Sighs of woe were glad sights mixt ;
With arms crossed, yet testifying
Restless rest, and living dying.
Their ears hungry of each word
Which the dear tongue would afford ;
But their tongues restrained from walking,
Till their hearts had ended talking (Song 8 17-24).
Yet, as soon as Astrophil tries to explain a physical desire for Stella, she
assumes complete control of her rational powers:
There his hands, in their speech, fain
Would have made tongue's language plain ;
But her hands, his hands repelling,
Gave repulse, all grace excelling.
. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .
Trust me, while I thee deny,
In myself the smart I try ;
Tyrant Honour doth thus use thee,
Stella's self might not refuse thee (Song 8 65-68, 93-96).
Although she considers that honor can be restraining and cruel (tyrant
honour), she maintains control over her own passions and knows better than to risk
her virtuous honor. Stella does not refuse Astrophil only for public honor because
her sense of virtue presides in the most private situations:
Your fair mother is abed,
Candles out, and curtains spread:
She thinks you do letters write.
Write, but first let me indite:
9
Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi Say: 26 Yl: 2009/1 (1-14 s.)
Take me to thee, and thee to me.
No, no, no, no, my dear, let be (Song 4 37-42).
Though Astrophil sneaks a kiss from her while she sleeps, she becomes
angered at his risk-taking:
And yet my Star, because a sugar'd kiss
In sport I suck'd, while she asleep did lie,
Doth low'r, nay chide; nay, threat for only this:
Sweet, it was saucy Love, not humble I.
But no 'scuse serves, she makes her wrath appear
In Beauty's throne; see now who dares come near
Those scarlet judges, threat'ning bloody pain? (LXXIII 5-11)
Stella does not lose sight of the dangers, the dishonor, and the scandal,
letting her rational concern for consequences guide her moral conduct although
Astrophil loses sight of these dangers that could befall him in his attempt to fulfill
his desires.
According to Sidney s philosophy in An Apology for Poesy, Astrophil
commits a grave mistake when he tries to confine reason to the exploration of the
abstract sciences. Man starves morally if he puts his faith in and devotes his reason
to these abstractions:
One that no other guide but the philosopher shall wade in him till
he be old before he shall find sufficient cause to be honest (Apology,
27).
In Astrophil and Stella, Astrophil often abuses reason when he tries to
employ it in the service of carnal desires. In order to conquer virtue and get some
food for desire, he formulates logical arguments throughout the sonnets. Especially
in sonnet 5, it is possible to identify that Astrophil is aware of dangers in trying to
establish a willful illusion regarding reason s role in his life, but he does not wish
to escape these dangers. Astrophil is aware that if he prefers passion to virtue, he
rebels against reason and his own nature; however he passionately feels to
compelled to love Stella:
It is most true, that eyes are form'd to serve
The inward light; and that the heavenly part
Ought to be king, from whose rules who do swerve,
Rebles to Nature, strive for their own smart.
It is most true, what we call Cupid's dart,
An image is, which for ourselves we carve:
And, fools, adore in temple of hour heart,
Till that good God make Church and churchman starve.
True, that ture beauty virtue is indeed,
Whereof this beauty can be but a shade,
10